Abstract
The harmonious development of cities is a key problem of our times. Is it possible to have sustainable urban areas that enhance rather than diminish the standard of living of their inhabitants? To better understand the issues behind this question, we begin by defining sustainability and the factors that should be associated with a sustainable urban development. We then consider urban mobility, focusing on one of its major challenges: vehicle congestion. With a view to devising possible solutions to the congestion challenge, we characterize it using basic tools from the field of traffic management and engineering. This reveals that, as with many other problems, apparently common sense solutions do not work, and in particular that congestion cannot be solved by road infrastructure construction alone. In this context, we also discuss two paradoxes that reinforce the idea that “obvious” solutions do not work, and outline certain phenomena suggesting that the worst enemy of urban sustainability is the indiscriminate use of private cars in congested scenarios. We then argue that urban development and mobility are wicked problems in organized complexity and, as such, do not have completely satisfactory solutions. In this light we propose what we believe has become the most consensual solution among specialists: a stick and carrot approach. The stick is a policy such as road pricing that charges for using cars in urban areas during congested periods, while the carrot consists of a good public transport system. Finally, we caution that this approach is unlikely to be implemented unless there is a political champion who is prepared to lead longer-term strategies that can capture the enthusiasm of the citizenry.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
Note, however, that in 1976, Caracas had the worst traffic jams in Latin America even though the city’s mayor had replaced all signalized intersections with grade separations.
See, for example, the notable column by Chilean sociologist Domingo Moreno, in which he analyses an article that appeared in a Santiago daily attacking those of us who propose the use of bicycles as a sustainable transport mode worthy of government support (https://medium.com/@domingomoreno/las-falacias-de-poduje-8f8d7d60ecca).
References
Ampt ES, Ortúzar J. de D (2004) On best practice in continuous large-scale mobility surveys. Transport Rev 24:337–363
Basso LJ, Silva HE, Riquelme I (2017) Urban road congestion management: capacity investments and pricing policies. 13th International Conference of the Western Economic Association International, June 3–6, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago
Braess D, Nagurney A, Wakolbinger T (2005) On a paradox of traffic planning. Transport Sci 39:446–450
Brundtlandt Report (1987) Our Common Future. Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development, UN Doc. A/42/427, Washington, D.C
Burford G, Hoover E, Velasco I, Janoušková S, Jimenez A, Piggot G, Podger D, Harder MK (2013) Bringing the “missing pillar” into sustainable development goals: towards intersubjective values-based indicators sustainability. Sustainability 5:3035–3059
Campoli J (2012) Made for walking: density and neighbourhood form. Lincoln Institute of Land Policy, Washington
Cantillo V, Ortúzar J. de D (2014) Restricting the use of cars by license plate numbers: a misguided urban transport policy. Dyna 81:75–82
CEDEUS (2017) Centro de Desarrollo Urbano Sustentable (www.cedeus.cl), Santiago (in Spanish)
CEDEUS-MINVU (2018) Sustentabilidad a escala de barrio: re-visitando el programa “quiero mi barrio”. Ministerio de Vivienda y Urbanismo, Santiago (in Spanish)
Cervero R, Kockelman K (1997) Travel demand and the 3Ds: density, diversity and design. Transp Res Part D Transport Environ 2:199–219
De Lisio A (1999) Desarrollo sustentable: opciones y limitaciones para América Latina y el Caribe. Revista Cuadernos del Cendes 16:1–23 (in Spanish)
Downs A (1962) The law of peak-hour expressway congestion. Traffic Quarterly 16:393–409
Duranton G, Turner M (2011) The fundamental law of road congestion: evidence from the US. Am Econ Rev 101:2616–2652
Harding T (2014) Common sense fallacy. (https://yandoo.wordpress.com/2014/12/28/common-sense-fallacy/). Accessed 20 June 2019
Hensher DA, Bliemer M (2014) What type of road pricing scheme might appeal to politicians? Viewpoints on the challenge in gaining the citizen and public servant vote by staging reform. Transp Res Part A Policy Pr 61:227–237
International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources (1980) World conservation strategy: living resource conservation for sustainable development. Gland, Switzerland
Jacobs J (1961) The death and life of great American cities. Random House, New York
Kimber RM, McDonald M, Hounsell N (1985) Passenger car units in saturation flows: concept, definition, derivation. Transp Research Part B Methodol 19:39–61
Littig B, Griessler E (2005) Social sustainability: a catchword between political pragmatism and social theory. Int J Sustain Dev 8:65–79
Miller E (2018) Viewpoint: integrated urban modelling—past, present and future. J Transport Land Use 11:387–399
Ministry of Transport (1963) Traffic in towns: a study of the long term problems of traffic in urban areas. Report of the Steering Group and Working Group appointed by the Minister of Transport, London, UK
Mogridge MJH, Holden DJ, Bird J, Terzis GC (1987) The Downs–Thomson paradox and the transportation planning process. Int J Transport Econ 14:283–311
Ortúzar J. de D, Bascuñán R, Salata A, Rizzi LI (2018) Assessing the potential acceptability of road pricing in Santiago. Transp Res Part A Policy Pr (under review)
Ortúzar J. de D, Willumsen LG (2011) Modelling transport. Wiley, Chichester
Rittel HWJ, Webber MM (1973) Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sci 4:155–169
Rizzi LI, de la Maza C (2017) The external costs of private versus public road transport in the Metropolitan Area of Santiago, Chile. Transp Res Part A Policy Pr 98:123–140
Schrank D, Eisele B, Lomax T, Bak J (2015) 2015 urban mobility scorecard. The Texas A&M Transportation Institute, College Station, Texas
Smart Growth America (2015) Safer streets, stronger economies: complete street project outcomes from across the country. Smart Growth America, Washington
Spangenberg JH, Omann I, Hinterberger F (2002) Sustainable growth criteria: minimum benchmarks and scenarios for employment and the environment. Ecol Econ 42:429–443
Thomson JM (1977) Great cities and their traffic. Gollancz, London
Walters AA (1961) The theory and measurement of private and social costs of highway congestion. Econometrica 29:676–699
Wilson P (2015) Urban sustainability theory and practice. Routledge, London
Acknowledgements
I would like to thank Margarita Greene and Juan Carlos Muñoz for their ideas and their constructive criticisms of the first draft of this article. Thanks are also due to Abdul R. Pinjari and an unknown referee for their useful comments. Finally, I am grateful for the support received for this research from CONICYT PIA/BASAL AFB180003, the Centre for Sustainable Urban Development—CEDEUS (CONICYT/FONDAP/15110020) and the BRT + Centre of Excellence (www.brt.cl), financed by the Volvo Research and Educational Foundations.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Ortúzar, J.d. Sustainable Urban Mobility: What Can Be Done to Achieve It?. J Indian Inst Sci 99, 683–693 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41745-019-00130-y
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s41745-019-00130-y